Lecture 6 – Oct 29

Chapter 9: Sexuality
Sex and Well-Being
 Distinguishes romantic relationships from close relationships
 Key mechanism through which relationships have health and well-being benefits, also a
stress reliever
 Most sex occurs within intimate relationships
 Rated as more important than stable income, shared interests, and sharing chores
 Married people who reported ongoing sex at age 70 were less likely to die 5 years later

Sex and Happiness

 Positive link b/w frequency and well-being
 Sex is the activity related to the most positive affect  should reallocate time towards
positive events
 Might cause pressure to have sex as frequently as possible, misguided beliefs that sex
frequency needs to be maximized
 Sexual frequency  relationship satisfaction  happiness
- Goes in both directions for newly-weds, but relationship satisfaction stops influencing
sexual satisfaction in long-term marriages
 People who are involuntarily celibate are less satisfied bc sex can’t be replaced by other
shared activities
 Ppl want their partner’s sexual history to be “just right” = not too little or too much

Do Benefits Level Off?

 Is decrease linear or curvilinear (level off)?
1. General social survey  measured how often people had sex (often, not at all) and
happiness (not happy, very happy, not too happy)
 married people have sex about once a week, single people had 2-3 times a month
 less married people reported having no sex at all compared to single people
 curvilinear effect  benefits do level off at a certain point at about once a week
- no additional positive association if more often
- single people had no relationship b/w frequency and benefits
2. National survey of Families and Households  asked about sexual frequency (open-ended)
and happiness (1-7 scale), and relationship quality (very happy to very unhappy)
 Curvilinear effect  benefits for relationship satisfaction levels off at about once a week
 *Individual differences in satisfaction and perception of frequency, but no difference in
demographics*
 Key findings  once a week is sufficient enough for benefits, do not need to aim to have sex
as frequently as possible (contrary to media messages)

Controlling for Sexual Frequency

 Couples randomly assigned to double frequency  did not report greater well-being, some
reported slightly lower mood and sexual enjoyment (backfired)
 - Possible that couples were already at max happiness and may not have room to improve
- intrinsic motivation (why you are having sex) is more important than frequency
 When people engaged in sex, they were happier the next day BUT feeling happy did not
lead to more sex (carry-over effect)
 Sexual after glow  positive emotions of having sex carries over for up to 48 hours

Sexual Technique
 Kama Sutra  implied that partners who know positions are skilled and increase
satisfaction BUT no actual correlation with satisfaction
 Men are more satisfied when their partner reaches organisms, but not the same for women
 Ppl who engage in mutual masturbation and oral sex report more satisfaction and orgasms
 Satisfaction also related to what ppl do before and after (setting the mood, cuddling, etc.)

Sexual Motivation
 Not all equally satisfying, depends on motives and reasons
 237 different reasons on why people engage in sex
- Release tension, it feels good, express appreciation, wanting to feel attractive, being
attracted, intimacy, fear of losing person, curiosity, obtaining resources, impressing
others, revenge, aid in falling asleep, obligation
 Sex releases oxytocin and vasopressin which are important in connection and intimacy
 Being exposed to subliminal sexy images increases arousal, attraction to partner, desire to
be with them, more willingness to sacrifice
 Sexual afterglow: lingering sense of elevated closeness and well-being after sex (up to 3
days)
1. Approach goals  pursue positive outcomes for partner or relationship, enhance intimacy
- Report higher desire, more satisfying experience, more relationship satisfaction
2. Avoidance goals  avert negative outcomes, conflict, losing partner, upsetting partner
- Lower desire and satisfaction
 Also depends on partner’s goals  person’s own avoidance goals lead partner to have less
desire and satisfaction = creates outcomes that people are trying to avoid in the first place
 Having sex for wrong reasons is worse than no sex at all

Compensation
 Ppl with negative affectivity report same relationship satisfaction as people w/o it when
they have sex more often = counteracts dwelling in pessimistic moods
 Sex can be more meaningful to insecure partners bc it reassures that relationship is safe,
effects of insecure attachment disappear in couples who have sex often
 Expressing high levels of desire can decrease partner’s anxiety over time
 Make-up sex can be used for reassurance that the relationship is still sound or stable

Physical Health
 Ppl who report more sex had increased salivary IgA, decreased rates of heart disease, better
performance on cognitive and memory tasks
 Kissing lowers cholesterol, intimacy reduces physical symptoms, sex affects hormone levels
(prolactin), sex burns calories

Sexual Satisfaction
 Each partner’s evaluation of sexual aspects of their relationship
 How happy and unhappy they are with sexual relationship
 Assessed on self-report of relational sexual activity, score is totalled b/w 6-36
 People rated a happy sexual relationship as key element of a successful relationship, more
important than shared interest, income, etc.
 People most satisfied with sex life are most satisfied with relationships
 True across married and dating couples, same-sex and mixed couples, younger and older
 Link is stronger for people who 1) think sex is more important, 2) more for men, 3) anxiously
attached people (more sensitive and affected by changes of sexual satisfaction)

Directionality of Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction

 longitudinal study on newlyweds  bidirectional association
 sexual satisfaction reported fewer declines in relationship satisfaction
 relationship satisfaction reported fewer declines in relationship satisfaction
 Sexual satisfaction (T1) led to more relationship (T2) and sexual satisfaction (T2)

Time Course of Sexual Desire

 Desire declines overtime as partner become more comfortable
 Aroused most by novelty and risk
 Commitment tends to be reinforced by feelings of familiarity and similarity
 The safer a relationship becomes, the less sexy it may seem
 Couples have less sex as they get older bc of age-related issues

TED Talk – Why is Desire so Difficult?

 Love is to have, desire is to want
 Went people are away from partner, they start imagining themselves with partner and miss
them more
 Wanting person is more attractive than needing them\

Maintaining Desire
 Decline in sexual desire are not inevitable or universal
 1 in 3 people report that passion in their relationship has stayed constant over time
 74% of people b/w 65-80 describe sex life as satisfying
 Age-related declines in desire are smaller for people in better relationships
 Novelty + security linked to desire
- Couples engage in more novel activities = higher sexual satisfaction, more likely to have
sex, higher relationship satisfaction
Responsiveness
 Men and women felt higher sexual desire for partners on days when their partners had
been more responsive to feelings/thoughts
- made receiving partner feel special and unique
- responsive partners are rated as more attractive to other people
 expectations of sexual exclusivity makes ppl feel safe in relationships
 Responsive support buffers against stress and has emotional benefits
 Sex can be an effective way to demonstrate responsiveness – understanding needs in
intimate domain
 GGG = good in bed, giving time and pleasure, and game for anything, which all people
should try to be as a sexual partner – Dave Savage
 Sexual responsiveness  sexual communal motivation means people are responsive to
sexual needs and interests of partners
- How far people will go to fulfil partner’s sexual desires (time of sex, position, trying new
things within reason)
- People high in sexual communal motivation are more satisfied in sex and relationship
AND have partners who are also more satisfied
- Maintain higher sexual desire over time, being low in sexual communal motivation
caused decline in desire
- Sexual communal motivation = daily approach sexual goals = daily sexual desire

Desire Discrepancies
 Rate sexual disagreements as more important and threatening than other conflicts = don’t
talk about it to avoid discomfort
 Sexual coercion: verbal, physical, or manipulative strategies/tactics to pressure partner into
unwanted sex (threatening to break up, nagging, interpreting refusal as “playing hard to
get”, arousing partner or displaying arousal, sex while partner is drunk)
- Persistent, say yes to appease partners, and consequential on relationships
 One partner may be interested while other is not in the mood
 Desire discrepancy occurs on 69% of the days
 People with sexual communal motivation focus more on benefits of their partner and less
focused on themselves = more likely to have sex AND higher relationship satisfaction
- Not just doing it out of obligation bc they still reported high satisfaction
 Partners need to balance their sexual needs  can’t be too communal or too responsive
 Unmitigated sexual communion: maintaining partner’s needs that is unmitigated by their
own agency, without considering their own comfort/needs (it doesn’t matter what I want)
 ppl who were unmitigated reported lower sexual experience and relationship satisfaction,
and no effects on partner (even though they were trying to focus on the other)
 may come across as unauthentic or miss positive cues

Barriers to Sex
 Sex recession: Married ppl are having less sex – patterns are the same across genders,
races, education level
 - 62 times a year in 1992, 53 times in 2012
 people are more stressed and spending more time working or raising kids
 couples who divide chores have sex more often and are more satisfied = fairness is related
to intimacy
 Internet increased accessibility of porn = people are less interested in real life experience
 rate partners less favourably bc they compare them to ppl in the porn, less satisfied,
decreases commitment to each other bc of alternatives, emphasizes sex over commitment
and compassion, increases men’s tolerance to violence, decreases fidelity
 infrequent use has no impact on satisfaction, female use can increase satisfaction for both
partners and male use decreases it
 couples where both partners watch porn are more satisfied than couples w/ discrepancies,
higher satisfaction when they do it together than alone (communication and expression)
 Social media increased feelings of anxiety and depression = less likely to be involved in
relationships
 Romantic pursuit is sometimes confused for sexual provocation
 Social shifts in how to initiate contact, what is acceptable, safety issues, etc.

Consensually Non-monogamous Relationships (CNM)

1. open relationships: openness in additional sexual relationships, but not usually loving
2. swinging: sexual relationships allowed outside relationship only in certain situations
3. polyamory: openness to sexual and emotional relationships with multiple ppl
 5% of people in existing relationships identify as non-monogamous, about 20% have
experience with it = increasing interest over time
 People in non-monogamous relationships can have similar levels of satisfaction,
commitment, passion, etc. with people in monogamous people, but have more trust and
less jealousy

Suffocation Model of Marriage

 People expect more of relationships than before – rely on one person for what an entire
community used to provide
 Non-monogamous relationships can outsource needs over multiple people
 If person is more fulfilled with first person, they can feel more satisfied in relationships with
second person
 Monogamish: acknowledging that there will be desire for others and incorporating that into
a committed relationship (Dan Savage)
- Still follow strict rules and guidelines
- Cheating and jealousy are less threatening because you can act on desires and don’t
have to break off relationships

Lecture 7 – Nov 5
Chapter 12: Beliefs and Expectation about Relationships
Cognition in Relationships
 Social cognition: cognitive process for social information
 Tend to be cognitive misers – try to save mental energy, take easiest paths or shortcuts
 People don’t agree on how to perceive behaviours, support, assigning blame, etc.

Relationship Beliefs
 Belief: idea or theory about what we think relationships are like, what is good vs. bad, etc.
 Value: opinion or attitude about what’s important, how ppl want things to be (ex: infidelity
is a good reason to leave a relationship)
 Ideal standards model: comparison b/w what is valued in relationship (ideal standard) vs.
what is perceived to be true of the current relationships (discrepancy = dissatisfaction)
 Perceptual confirmation: when we expect ppt to behave in a certain way, we behave their
behaviour that ways too
 ppl high on rejection sensitivity can perceive an ambiguous experience as a personal assault
1. disagreements are destructive  maybe, but more important to navigate and resolve them
2. “mindreading” shows couples in sync  couples should communicate and express
themselves, instead of trying to get partners to read them
3. Partners can’t change  can have behavioural and motivational changes, leads people to
not mention anything because they don’t think anything will change
4. Sex must be perfect every time  can make any small issue more significant than it is
5. Gender differences are large  not supported by evidence, gay/lesbian couples experience
less conflict because they don’t default to gender roles and stereotypes

Origin of Beliefs and Values

 Culture: shared attitudes, beliefs, norms, and values among ppl who speak the same
language or share a geographic area, during a certain period of time
 Ex: different values on suitable mates, entering marriage, and divorce
 Media portrayals influence relationship beliefs, evaluations, and behaviours
 Ex: watching violent film with positive consequences leads people to be more accepting of
sexual violence against women
 Influences beauty standards through magazines, billboards, screens, etc.
 Adolescents who watch shows with a lot of sexual content are more likely to start having
sex before peers  learn from TV that they are supposed to have sex
 Educating ppl on media effects can influence their resistance to persuasive messages

Destiny vs. Growth Beliefs

 Destiny: people are destined to be compatible or not
- Believe that relationships are determined from the start; idealistic
- Initially happier with relationships, which predicts longevity
- Disappointed and distressed when there is a disagreement or conflict
- High initial satisfaction predicts longer relationship, low initial satisfaction predicts
shorter relationship
 Growth: good relationships take work and effort
- Believe that relationships can grow and change
- Differences are opportunities for resolution
 - constructive, optimistic, and committed in the face of conflicts

Sexual Destiny Beliefs

 Jessica Maxwell people’s lay beliefs about how sexual satisfaction is maintained
 Destiny  first sex encounter determines how satisfying sex will be, must find sexual
soulmate
 Growth  sexual relationship require maintenance (like a garden)
 Sexual growth believers will be higher in sexual and relationship satisfaction – put more
effort in handling disagreements or difference in interests
- positive correlation b/w beliefs and satisfaction
 Sexual destiny believers will respond more negatively and feel less satisfied when
disagreements or difference in interests arise (think partner is not the one for them)
- more negatively impacted when there was a disagreement
 both believers happy when there is low disagreement, but high destiny believers were more
dissatisfied/ impacted when there was sexual disagreement
 growth believers may be more satisfied because they can successfully navigate conflicts
 Implication  media messages about finding soulmates and the “right person”, BUT work
and effort are required and lead to higher satisfaction and better navigation

Relationship Attributions
 Explanation used to understand other people’s behaviours
 Ex: “my partner bought me flowers because….”
 Tend to describe ppl’s behaviour in the middle b/w specific and general = connect
behaviour to higher meaning but still distinguishes ppl
 Behavioural confirmation: our beliefs and expectations can also shape the way we
experience the world affecting our behaviours
 Self-fulfilling prophecy: behaviour that leads to an experience that is expected to happen
- Secure and insecure attached ppl behave in a way that confirms their attachment
 accuracy motive: desire to understand a partner and be understood  results in diagnostic
bias by looking for info that indicates important qualities
 confirmation bias: tendency to look for evidence that supports what is already known
about partner and ignore evidence that refutes it
 ex: ppl who believe partner is socially unskilled ignore feedback that partner is skilled
 justification motive: focusing on partner’s negative qualities increases own self-esteem by
relieving person from the blame of failed relationship, focusing on partner’s good qualities
justifies why the relationship is being pursed
 Self-serving bias: attributing success to internal personal qualities and failures to external
circumstances or other ppl
 Actor/observer bias: attribute different reasons for our own actions compared to the same
behaviour by others
- Have more info to attribute our own behaviours, cognitive misers for explaining others
 Locus dimension  internal attributions are due to the person, external attributions are
due to something else
 Stability dimension  stable attributions are lasting, unstable attributions are temporary

Attributions + Satisfaction
 Good behaviour  getting a box of chocolate = my partner is thoughtful (internal) vs. they
got it for free and gave it to me (external)
 Bad behaviour  partner snaps at you for being late = they are impatient and irritable
(internal) vs. they are having a bad day (external)
 Satisfied = make more internal attributions for good behaviour + external for bad behaviour
 Unsatisfied = make external attributions for good behaviour + internal for bad behaviour
 Ppl are happier when perceptions of the relationship match their beliefs and standards
 Attributions also affect satisfaction – good attributions can enhance relationship OR
maintain distress
 relationship-enhancing attributions (benevolent) can cause people to excuse severe
problems (ex. drinking too much), but beneficial for minor problems (leaving socks on the
floor) – need to be ACCURATE

Relationship Expectations
 Stability  predictions about stability and consistency
 Mostly smooth sailing vs. lots of ups and downs
 Low anxious/ low avoidance attachment (secure) expect relationships to be stable over time
 When secure individuals experience drops or fluctuations in how they feel about partners,
they are less satisfied – their expectations of security are violated
 People low in avoidance/anxiety experience greater dissatisfaction with more fluctuations,
but greater satisfaction with less fluctuations (negative correlation)

Optimistic Predictions
 people overestimate relationships and are not accurate, perceive partner and relationships
as better than average
 MacDonald and Ross (1999) – recruited couples, parents, and roommates; estimated quality
and how long they expect relationships to last
- Couples overestimate relationship quality compared to parents and roommates =
relationship enhancement strategy
- Couples predicted longest time, then parents, then roommates
- Roommates were least optimistic and most accurate
- There was some correlation to how long people expect relationship to last and how long
it did last, relatively compared to others
 Endo et al. (2000) – participants of all ethnicity claimed their relationships are better than
average university student

Positive Illusions
 Motivated reasoning: motives, desires, and preferences influence/bias how we perceive
and interpret partner’s behaviours
 Enhancement motive: wanting to believe relationship is successful, partner is trustworthy,
and investment is justified  leads to enhancement bias
 judge partners more favourably than they judge themselves
 advantages  increased relationship satisfaction and last longer
- give benefit of the doubt and enhancing attributions
- focus on positive rather than negative, which minimizes conflicts
- leads partner to feel good about themselves and fosters secure attachment
 partner- fulfilling prophecy: partners may “live up” to the idealized image of them
 disadvantages  depend on how unrealistic illusions are
- might feel like they can’t live up to expectations
- might feel like they are misunderstood or being lied to
- worry that you are in love with an illusion and not their true selves
 can revise expectations of an ideal partner to match with actual partner

Self-Verifications
 Self-verification: seen more accurately
 Self-concepts are developed from interactions with others
 Violations of self-concepts are viewed as a threat to intra and interpersonal functioning
 lead to existential concerns about how one sees themselves
 we seek confirmation/verification whether it is positive or negative
 self-concept + spouse appraisal  ppl with positive self-concept were most committed
when partner’s appraisal is also positive
- people with negative self-concept felt less committed when partner’s appraisal was also
negative
- negative self-concept + negative appraisal AND positive self-concept + negative
appraisal felt equal commitment
- positive self-concept + positive appraisal felt most commitment

Positive Illusions vs. Self-Verifications

 In new relationships, positive illusions may be more beneficial
 Longer relationships may benefit more from self-verification = should know the partner well
 When it is related to aspects of self-concept that are very important, self-verification is
important

Responding to Negative Experiences

 Accommodation: changing existing beliefs in order to accept new info – learning from
experiences results in new understandings
 Assimilation: integrating new info with existing knowledge w/o changing original beliefs –
new experiences fit right into current understanding
- Can’t always ignore negative evidence forever, depends on the severity, people’s
capacity to accept new info fluctuates (ex. during fights or fights)
 selective attention: desires and goals affect what info we notice, how long we pay
attention, and what we overlook, without conscious awareness
 - People committed to current partners spent less time looking at photos of attractive ppl
bc they didn’t want info that would make their partners seem less attractive
 Memory bias: recalling the past in ways that support or justify current feelings about
relationship
- Couples increase in satisfaction recall early ratings of partner as better, ppl who
decreased recall early ratings as worse
 Flexible standards: whatever is currently perceived to be positive is important, and
whatever is currently perceived to be negative is dismissed as unimportant
- Couples who are resilient and flexible respond better to ups and downs
 Social comparison: using info from other to examine own attitudes and abilities  should
use downward comparison instead of upward

Protecting Relationships
 Commitment calibration hypothesis: threats to a relationship should motivate activities to
defend it, if the threat is proportionate to the couple’s commitment
 unhappily married people + happy daters rated pictures less attractive bc they were more
threatened, happily married + unhappy daters rated pictures more attractive bc they were
less threatened
- When ppts were told that alternative partners rated them, the results were flipped
 Unhappy couples are less motivated to protect their relationships against threats less
assimilation of negative info  raises doubts and discourages protective motivation further

Lecture 8 – Nov 12
Chapter 4: Gender
Sex vs. Gender
 Ppl express preference for faces that are easy to categorize
 Sex is biological features that characterize male and female of a species
 Primary characteristics are from birth and used in reproduction, secondary characteristics
emerge during puberty and signal fertility or maturity
 Binary assumption: sex is defined as 2 fixed, unchanging, non-overlapping categories
 Intersex: possessing features or chromosomes that aren’t clearly identified as M or F
 Most features are hidden, we judge people’s behaviour as their gender not their sex
 gender is attitudes, behaviours, and expectations, and traits that culture identifies as
masculine and feminine
 tertiary characteristics are gender-related expectations imposed by culture or society
 gender identity: perception of oneself as masculine or feminine, defined by tertiary traits
 cisgender: match b/w sex and gender  labeled as female and identify as feminine
 transgender: mismatch b/w sex and gender  can alter biology, dress differently, use
different pronouns, etc.

Expression Varieties
 gender expression: how one fulfills expectations about their gender through behaviour and
interactions with others
 gender stereotypes mirror and reinforce social structures that give disproportionate control
and authority to men
 male traits lead to career success, female traits lead to relationship success
 Traits should be expressed in dimensions not binary
 Can be masculine, feminine, androgynous (high F, high M), undifferentiated (low F, low M)
 Androgynous ppl are more competent in many situations, less constrained by gender
expectations, higher self-esteem, lower anxiety, emotional intelligence, emotionally
expressive, can change situations or accept it when it’s out of their control
- More desirable partners, more secure in relationships, less likely to need help with
relationship problems

Thinking and Behaviour

 Schemas: cognitive representations that organize ideas and beliefs about what it means to
be a man or woman
 conceptions of gender are absorbed through our everyday social interactions
 More flexibility and options in how ppl identify themselves (Facebook, Tinder)

History of Gender
 Changing attitudes and opinions over time, not consistent across cultures
 Men used to be viewed as skilled hunters, women were home workers and too emotional
 Identifying babies with pink and blue is a recent invention and used to be the opposite
 Also differ in relationship skills  Greeks used to believe that males were better at
relationships for public life and females were more selfish and emotions for homelife
 Roles are becoming more flexible overtime, but stereotypes still hold and have negative
impact on health

Similarities vs. Differences

 Measurement  meta-analysis show lots of overlap b/w men and women
 D- statistic (0-1, + or 1)  #s closer to 1 show differences, - means trait is higher for women,
+ means trait is higher for men
 small effects = women are happier, men have higher self-esteem
 Medium effects = women have more anxiety, guilt, and fear on sex, emotional support
seeking, decoding non-verbal behaviour. Men have more intrusive interruptions, verbally
aggressive, and assertive
 Large effects = women are better at expressing emotions, importance of partner’s ambition
and social class, and tender-minded. Men emphasize partner’s attractiveness, physical
aggression, positive attitudes towards casual sex, and masturbate more
 conclusion  regardless of the variable, average differences b/w men and women are
generally small

Why People Differ

 Evolution influences mate preferences  women prefer driven, resourceful, and supportive
men, men prefer attractive, youthful, trustworthy, and faithful women
 - Intrasexual competition: ways men and women compete to gain advantages in mating
- Mate preference depends on how ppl are treated in their cultures
 Learned behaviour  gender inequalities influence expectations and behaviours that
reinforce them
- Power: person’s capacity to alter behaviour and experiences of others, while resisting
their influence

Social Structure Theory

1. Structural differences in power and status (industrial revolution = men working in factories,
women working at home)
2. Expectations for certain behaviours and skills are formed (men are providers and
independent, women are relationship-focused and nurturing)
3. Formulation of stereotypes (men are breadwinners, women are housemakers)
4. Socialization into stereotype and punishing deviance (boys are taught to be rough and
competitive, girls taught to be warm and cooperative)
5. Gender-differentiated behaviour and psychology results (men become firefighters; women
become nurses)
 Need to change structural differences (step 1) to change behaviours and psychology (step 5)
 Society punishes ppl who violate expectations (ex. violence towards transgenders)

Gender and Intimacy

 Women describe events b/w a couple, men describe events b/w crowds of people
 Men have stronger physiological response when dominance is threatened, women have
greater response when relationships are threatened
 Before industrial revolution, work and family life were the same and everyone contributed
equally
 Division of labour results in unequal pay, values about importance, and women’s
dependency on partners  translates into relationships

Relationship Awareness
 women connect with a few close others, recall details with greater accuracy, more
emotional, more complex representations and memories, take couple-focused than self-
focused
 women have more complex mental representations of relationship events (spaghetti vs.
waffle), more motivated to understand their relationships
 divorcing men are more likely to not know why their relationship ended

Expressing Emotion and Caring

 Both have skills to be emotionally supportive and expressive
 Men respond with support AND criticism  taught that to be manly and not emotional
 Women are just as distressed as their partners who have cancer, men show as much
distress as healthy controls assume their role is to provide care vs. assuming someone
else will provide care
 Empathetic accuracy: capacity to be accurate in knowing what someone else is thinking or
feeling  stereotype is activated for women and they try to represent their gender
 Lower-class ppl express greater emotional accuracy than upper-class

Interest in Sex
 Men experience pressure to express interest and pursue it (go for it!) = sex is for pleasure
 Men are more motivated, have more spontaneous thoughts and fantasies, more sexual
frequency, more partners, masturbate more, greater variety, make more sacrifices to have
sex, more likely to initiate and less likely to refute sex
 Women are shamed for having too little interest (prude) or too much interest (slut), have to
enticing to men but also chaste and pure, and pressured to be physically beautiful = sex is a
source of threat and trauma
 Women have to consider financial, biological (getting pregnant), and violent issues
 75% of men agreed to have one-night stand with stranger, 0% of women agreed
 Interest in sex is not hardwired, but responsive to social change

Ending Relationships
 Women recognize problems, accept and initiate therapy earlier
 Women predict, talk about, and file for divorce sooner
 Socialization = women are encouraged to pay more attention to others, women are more
likely to be financially dependent on men, so they want to find someone who is supportive

Chapter 5: Sexual Orientation

Sexual Orientation Expression
 Way in which we purse love, attachment, and meaningful social connections with others
1. romantic attraction: feelings of infatuation, love, and emotional desire
2. sexual arousal: physiological response to same-sex and different-sex ppl
3. sexual attraction: fantasies, feelings of lust, and erotic desires (most important)
4. sexual behaviour: overt sexual interactions engaged in with another person
5. sexual identity: way a person understands and labels their attraction and sexual
attractions with other people
 Sexual and romantic attraction are tightly intertwined  ex: straight ppl are physically
aroused by homosexual arousing videos but no pupil dilation (attraction)
 Differences in attraction/partners differ across lifespan – usually identified at adolescence
but may change depending on availability, social norms, family influence, etc.
 British survey  28% of men and 45% of women who were gay identified as being straight =
attraction, behaviours, and identities don’t always correspond
 Should ask/measure orientation on a dimension, not just 2 categories

Gender Differences in Sexual Orientation

 Women are aroused by wider range of stimuli regardless of the sex of the stimuli, men’s
arousal corresponds with their identity
 Women’s sexual orientation is more fluid (changing, expanding) over time, men’s
orientation is more stable and less likely to fluctuate
 Women may believe attraction is subject to change and is context-specific (lesbian/bisexual
before graduation)  sexualize whoever they love
 Men identify potential partners based on gender that arouses them  love who they
sexualize
 Women are more likely to be mostly heterosexual or bisexual, men are more likely to be
completely gay or straight
 Women are more influenced by sociocultural, men are more influenced by biology

Asexuality
 Lack of sexual desire and attraction (aces)
 NOT bc of celibacy, medical conditions, not troubled by orientation, not a black/white
category that can be easily identified
 Gray asexual or semisexual: ppl who are mostly asexual but feel occasional attraction
 Demisexual: ppl who experience attraction after establishing a strong affectionate bond
with someone
 Coming out process  realizing they might be different from same-sex peers, being
confused about sexual identity and fitting in socially, seeking info to explain how they’re
different, recognizing and accepting sexual identity that differs
- Process is the same for all sexual minorities including asexual
 Can still get physically aroused but no feelings of lust or attraction – arousal doesn’t
motivate behaviours
 Can also be aromantic asexual or romantic asexual (heteroromantic, homoromantic,
biromantic, panromantic)

Origins of Sexuality
 Evolution: genetic component to sexual attraction  24% of twins share orientation and
1/3 of variability is due to genes
 Paradox = gene didn’t die off bc 37% of people who are gay or asexual still have biological
children that carry and pass on the “gene”
 Gay people are more likely to invest in raising their close relatives’ children and ensure the
survival of those genes
 Reduced reproduction is compensated for by increased fertility in their straight relatives
 Prenatal hormones: high levels of testosterone during development can make people
masculinized (attracted to women), low levels can make ppl feminized (attracted to men)
 high testosterone = lesbians’ hands are more similar to straight men’s hands
 children who are gender nonconforming are 10x more likely to be homosexual  could
also be due to prenatal testosterone levels
 Social influence: society may influence orientation (5 factors) but not attraction
 Having gay parents does not affect a child’s gender conformity and role development
 Socialization leads women to be more fluid
 Therapy is not effective at changing orientation, socialization has less of an effect than
influence of testosterone

Intimate Relationships
 Underrepresentation of same-sex couples in literature bc of stigma
 Both homosexual and heterosexual couples are more similar than they are different
 Discrimination can be overt (not getting hired) or subtle (being laughed at)
 Possible rejection from friends and family
 Might disagree on how “out” they should be
 Lowers self-esteem and more avoidance (ex. avoid holding hands)
 Internal homonegativity: gay person’s negative attitudes towards themselves, leading to
devaluation of their self, internal conflicts, and low self-regard
- Believe their relationships are less valuable in society than straight one
 No actual differences in relationship well-being  overcoming stigma makes them closer
and have close networks for social support (more likely to remain friends with exes)

Advantages
 NO gender differences –similarity b/w same-sex partners make cooperation easier
 seek same values in relationships and have same ratings of satisfaction or intimacy
 Greater emphasis of equality and fairness
 Divide labour equally, negotiate chores, emphasize equality and fairness
 Gender deviance neutralization: ppl in heterosexual couples behave in ways that reinforce
their identity as men and women
 More constructive communication about conflict, more affectionate and less sad during
conflicts, don’t follow standard status hierarchy of men and women in disagreements

Sexual Activity
 Lesbian couples have less sexual frequency BUT better quality (longer duration, more
variety in activities, and more orgasms)
 Gay couples are most likely to be Monogamish (accepting to open relationships)
- Mutual trust, acknowledge jealousy, have clear guidelines, and flexibility about
guidelines (being honest or not talking about it), discuss power and control

Cultural Perspectives
What is Culture
 System of values, beliefs, norms, practices etc.
 Groups can be considered to have cultures if they have shared knowledge that influences
behaviours and thoughts
 People’s cultures shape many aspects of their lives and ppl value their cultures
 Use cultures to make decisions or as part of self-identity
 research is not diverse, 96% done in Western culture, 68% ppts are American  overlooks
people’s cultures and their influences
 understanding how our own culture affects us can make us more understanding,
compassionate, and inclusive

Romantic Relationships Across Cultures

 Romantic love is universal, people of all cultures experience it (passion, desire)
 Romantic love is not always the reason for marriage, uncommon for ppl to choose partners
without family approval, more common for men to be choosing

Marriage
 Marriages are a way to secure alliances and resources b/w resources
 Marriage for love prioritizes individual needs over group needs
 In cultures with weaker family ties, romantic love is more important for marriage
- Less familial pressure = romantic love is necessary glue to keep couple together
- More familial pressure = romantic love can threaten family’s goals
 Individualistic cultures prioritize independent goals and have beliefs for love as the basis for
marriage
 Collectivistic cultures prioritize interdependence and community goals and don’t have
beliefs for love as the basis of marriage
 80% of Western and Latin Americans said they wouldn’t marry someone they didn’t love,
50% of East/South Asians said they would

Beliefs and Expectations

 Western culture: a personal will only someone they chose
- Marriage is only about the couple not their families
- Marriage that isn’t based on love is doomed to be miserable
 passion and marital satisfactions decrease overtime in chosen marriages, but increase
overtime in arranged marriage to the same level that chosen marriages began
- Don’t start off without any love at all, not marrying a total stranger
- People in arranged marriages expect that they will fall in love
 Chinese culture: passion love is fleeting and ultimately brings sorrow, not joy
 Indian culture: arranged marriages are more likely to succeed than love marriages
 Cultures change overtime  ex: modern marriage in India has increased overtime to be
semi-arranged and using on-line dating websites

Bicultural
 Ppl who identify and experiences with at least 2 cultures
 Can be from 2 different cultures or have a partner from another culture
 Sometimes try to integrate both cultures into one (ex. wedding dresses)
 Normative conflict: when reconciling cultures’ norms is not possible, can be very distressing
especially for adolescents
 Feeling torn b/w cultures evoke shame and guilt and negatively predicts self-esteem and life
satisfaction
 Best outcomes occur when people can integrate cultures w/o choosing one and feel
supported by others

Intercultural Couples
 Still face discrimination today
 Intercultural relationships are as satisfied as monocultural relationships
 Partners can grow together through cultural differences (self-expansion)
 Do intercultural couples who feel that they grow through their partners (self-expansion) do
better at managing their cultural differences and more fulfilling, lasting, relationships?

Lecture 9 – Nov 19
Chapter 10: Conflict
Conflict Frequency
 Conflict: participants of social interactions have goals, tasks, and objectives, which could
interfere with another person’s (Lewin)
 Inescapable/ inevitable in relationships, especially when couples are highly interdependent
 People can learn to argue more effectively and decrease future disagreements
 Poor communication is the leading cause of needing counselling
 2.3 conflicts per week for dating couples
 married couples have major disagreements 3% of days and minor disagreements 20% of
days (almost as equal as doing something fun together 24% of days)
 partners agreed for 98% of major conflicts and 82% of minor conflicts (no desirability effect)

What do Couples Fight About?

 Care and discipline of kids (children) = most frequent
 Allocation and performance of tasks (household tasks)
 Paying attention, listening, and misunderstanding (communication)
 Time spent at work or with co-workers (leisure)
 Bills, purchases, spending wages (work)
 Annoying behaviours (money)
 Family, in-laws, stepchildren, ex-spouses (relatives)
 Annoying behaviours (habits)
 Meaning of commitment and infidelity (commitment)
 Displays of affection, sex (intimacy)
 Time spend and activities with friends (friends)
 Personality traits (personality) = least frequent

Social Learning Theory

 Divorce increased after WWII and was at a peak in 1980s
 Coercion  misguided choices they make during arguments make situation worse rather
than solve differences; unintentionally reinforce negative behaviours
 Relationships become less fulfilling bc couples don’t learn skills to manage them or how to
solve disagreements
 Communication skills = cooperative, prosocial, nurturing, empathetic, warm, supportive

Causes of Conflict
 Autonomy vs. connection: relationships require that ppl balance their needs for freedom
and their need for intimacy with others
 Openness vs. closedness: want to be open and honest with our partners, or want to
preserve privacy
 Stability vs. change: want stability in relationships, but too much may be boring and desire
for exciting changes
 Integration vs. separation: how much overlap someone wants with their partner outside
their relationship (friend groups, going out, etc.)

Conflict in Relationships – John Gottman

 Harsh setup: beginning a conversation in a negative or accusatory tone results in conflict
 96% of tone of first 3 minutes predicts the outcome of the conflict
 Ex: why are you emotionally unavailable (negative) vs. I miss you and want to spend time
with you (positive)
 Structural model of marital interaction:
1. Less positive, more negative – unhappy couples 10x more likely to use negative tone
(how it’s said is more important than what is said)
2. Predictability of behaviour b/w partners – unhappy couples are more predictable bc
how they behave is governed by what is said (limited in tone of argument, usually ends
in the same outcome every time)
3. Longer cycles of reciprocal -ive behaviour – unhappy couples more likely to reciprocate
negativity and be stuck there  can get trapped in cycle or decide to exit them
 Happy couples engage in cognitive editing: hearing something negative but responding in
neutral or positive way  breaks cycle of negativity
 Reactivity hypothesis: unhappy couples are more sensitive to tone of immediate events, on
guard and ready to find meaning (good or bad) to judge how relationship is going
 Happy couples respond positively, and unhappy couples respond negatively to the same
message (constructively vs. criticism or attack)

Conflict Patterns
 4 horsemen of apocalypse
1. Criticism: attacking personality or character, rather than airing disagreements by focusing
on specific behaviour
- About global traits, not specific behaviours
- I can’t believe you didn’t take out the trash vs. I’m upset you didn’t take out the trash
2. Contempt: tearing down or being insulting towards partner, disrespect and disgust, acting
superior (rolling eyes, sneering, or using sarcastic put-downs), brushes the person off
- You wouldn’t know the answer if it hit you in the face
 - erodes immune system
3. defensiveness: denying responsibility, making excuses, cross-complaining (it’s your fault,
not mine)
- natural response to “attack”, but endangers feelings of tension and prevents partners
from hearing each other
- I didn’t cheat on you; we were on a break!
4. Stonewalling: refusing to respond, withdrawing from the conflict/relationship/partner
- Ppl think they’re trying to make the situation better, but they just make their person
more frustrated
- Ignoring partner, leaving the room, picking up a book, etc.

Behavioural Patterns
 Demand/withdraw pattern: one partner is more involved and wants more emotional
connection, other partner is satisfied with how things are  blame each other
 Polarized: couples adopt different viewpoints/positions in arguments
 Women tend to want more change (demanding), which can result in men withdrawing 
true for gay/lesbian couples too bc of gender norms/roles

Response to Conflict
 Active/passive and constructive/destructive
 4 categories  voice, loyalty, exit, and neglect
 Active + destructive = exit
 Active + constructive = voice
 Passive + destructive = neglect
 Passive + constructive = loyalty
 Voice: common in satisfying relationships and secure attachment
 Destructive: common in ppl with attractive alternatives, insecure attachment, endorsing
masculine gender roles (it’s more feminine to talk about problems/feelings)

Partner Regulation
 Attempts to change partners’ undesirable behaviour
 Used to enhance relationship, not to be mean (not criticism or contempt)
 Requests vary in valence (positive or negative) and directness (direct or indirect)
1. Positive direct  rational reasoning, presenting accurate info, pros and cons,
consequences, suggest solutions, explain POV
- I know you love video games, but we should try going outside together because it’s
good for your health and makes us closer
2. Positive indirect  soft positive, minimize problem, change the topic, validate partner’s
views, express positive affect (humor), dancing around the problem
- Ex: I understand you love video games, it’s not a big deal, you’re dating games more
than me, haha
3. Negative direct  coercion: criticism, blame, indicate negative or threatening punishments,
negative affect, such as yelling or cursing
 - OR autocracy: make clear demands, authority position, exert superiority, invalidate
partner, sarcasm, patronizing, interrupting, rejecting arguments, etc.
4. Negative indirect  avoiding the problem, negative affect without explanation (silent
treatment), sarcasm, sulking, pouting
 Short-term benefits of positive (indirect or direct) strategies: greater perceived success of
interaction, more positive affect
 Long-term benefits of direct (positive or negative) strategies: greater reduction of problems
or behaviour, more stable satisfaction
- Negative direct can convey severity of the problem
 BUT depends on severity of the problem  negative direct are associated with greater
problems and declines in satisfaction with a minor problem (ex. leaving socks on the floor)
 Fewer problems and increases in satisfaction with major problems that threaten the
relationships (ex. drug abuse)
 When newlyweds show positive emotions, poor communication skills have little effect on
marriage changes 4 years later
 Stress hormone levels were lowest for happy married couples, then unhappy married
couples, then divorced couples when resolving important relationship problems
- higher stress hormone level predicted divorce or unhappiness 10 years later

Attachment Theory and Conflict

 Secure ppl are not threatened by partner’s emotions or discussing problems and will not be
a threat to partner, good problem solvers
 Anxious ppl are threatened by conflict bc it interferes with approval and support they need;
assume the worst, obsess about conflicts, express anxiety and hostility
 Avoidant ppl are threatened by conflict bc it may need them to be vulnerable, avoid
arguments by deflecting partner’s concerns, defend themselves, or keep partner at distance
 Ppl with less sensitive parents show more physiological arousal when discussing quality of
relationships in adulthood
 factors far-removed can affect how ppl think, feel, and act in confrontations of current
relationships

Jealousy
 Reaction to threat to a valued relationship  hurt, anger, and fear
 Reactive jealousy is response to actual threat, suspicious jealousy is response to no actual
threat
 Reactive jealousy is normative, people differ in suspicious jealousy

Factors Affecting Jealousy Experience

 No gender differences
 Relationship dependence, low alternatives
 Unable to meet partner’s needs
 Discrepancies in relational and mate value
 Anxious attachment style
 personality (neuroticism, low agreeableness)
 traditional gender roles (men might be jealous to show ownership of partners)

Who Makes Us Jealous?

 Rivals who make us look bad
 Rivals with greater mate value

What Makes Us Jealous?

 60% of men are jealous of a one-time sexual encounter with someone else
 83% of women are jealous of a lasting, emotionally intimate relationship with someone else
 Could also be due to men’s sensitivity and reactions to sex in general
 Jealousy motivated protective factors  men are more threatened by sexual infidelity bc of
paternity uncertainty, women are more threatened by differential investment
 Both men and women hate both types of infidelity

Response to Jealousy
 Cognitive  warranted or unwarranted suspicions, motivated self-concept to change and
become similar to a rival
 Emotional  feelings of negativity in response to jealousy (upset, distress, threat)
 Behavioural  detective or protective measures (snooping, retaliating, increasing
desirability)
 Personal outcomes  all 3 components are associated with worse personal outcomes
- Loss of relationship rewards, self-esteem, depression, anxiety, anger
 Relationship outcomes  cognitive and behavioural jealousy are associated with lower
satisfaction and commitment bc of destructive behaviours BUT emotional jealousy is not
(could be a reminder of how much we care about the partner)

Differences in Responses
 Attachment style  secure ppl express concerns and try to repair relationships
- Avoidant ppl devalue partner
- Anxious ppl may become clingier or demanding
 Gender differences  women tend to improve their value, increase attractiveness, please
partners
- Men tend to drive rivals away

Reducing Jealousy
 Asked to rate attractive photos and whether they would date them, told one partner to
always rate highly
 Intervention = told half the couples to touch partners during ratings
 Touch did not affect jealousy feelings for secure ppl, but decreased jealousy feelings for
anxious ppl
 Touch can decrease jealousy, especially for anxious ppl
Social Media and Jealousy
 Study 1  the more people spend time using Facebook, the more jealousy they experience
- Women spent more time on Facebook
- More time predicted increased jealousy only for women (controlling other factors)
 Study 2  exposure to jealousy trigger on Facebook will lead to more information seeking
- Stimulated FB and shown a picture that was either a friend, cousin, or unknown person
- Shown a profile of their “boyfriend” with another girl
- Men and women reported most jealousy if the person was unknown or a mutual friend
- Only women spent more time “creeping” the more jealous they felt, no link for men
 Implications = social media gives us more opportunity for networking and socializing, but
creates new challenges for relationships  need to learn how to maximize rewards

Chapter 11: Infidelity and Aggression

Infidelity
 Violation of an agreement b/w ppl that share intimate emotional & sexual lives exclusively
 Physical: intimacy outside of the relationship, occurs along a continuum of physical
involvement – elicits more anger
 Emotional: intimacy with another person, characterized by emotional intimacy, secrecy, or
sexual chemistry, ignoring or excluding the primary partner – elicits more hurt and sadness
 AKA affairs, extradyadic sex, extramarital sex, extramarital involvement
 Social media has made infidelity possible even without physical contact

Prevalence
 15-25% in marriages (but less likely than unmarried couples)
 37% of men and 19% of women in older studies, but gender gap is becoming smaller
 25-60% in dating relationships
 40% of men and 44% of women attribute divorce to infidelity
 Occurs slightly more for gay/lesbian and bisexual couples than straight ones
 Increases chance of divorce by 2x, 50% of couples are likely to divorce of separate after
 2nd leading cause of divorce for women after emotional problems, 3rd for men
 3rd most difficult issue to treat in therapy (after lack of loving feelings and alcoholism)
 Most ppl believe it’s unacceptable and expect exclusivity, but only 50% of dating couples
have explicit agreement
 4-5% of ppl in relationships are consensual non-monogamous

Why People are Unfaithful

 Women do it more than men bc of distraction or doubts
 Men and women are equal for neglect or distance
 Men are higher for sexual dissatisfaction in current relationship
 Few men and women do it for anger and revenge

Esther Perel
 Affairs are universally unacceptable but universally practiced and misunderstood
 More acceptable for men and not women
 Secretive relationships, emotional connection, sexual alchemy
 Imagination is responsible for love  kissing can be as bad sex
 we turn to 1 person to fulfil endless list of needs; infidelity destroys and causes ppl to
question their self-concepts and trust
 current culture promotes self-pleasure, personal happiness, pursuing interests
 staying with cheaters is the new shame
 pulls of other relationships outside current ones are not commonly studied
 as technology expands, definitions of infidelity expand
 hard to study prevalence because of the broad definitions

Theories to Predict Infidelity

 Evolutionary or sexual strategies  men cheat to spread more genetic material; women
cheat to get good genetic material, have diverse offspring, replacing for a better mate
- Genetics account for 40% of variance in cheating in twin studies, but attitudes are linked
to social upbringing
- Genetics factors (dopamine receptor sensitivity, vasopressin) predispose ppl to be more
reward-seeking, but there is not “cheating gene”
 Attachment  avoidant ppl increase relationship difficulties and make the other person
more likely to cheat to meet their needs outside relationship, anxious ppl worry more
 Self-expansion  seeking new experiences, decreases in passion or boredom
 Independence  high quality of alternatives (CLalt)

Red Flags
1. Sociosexuality: willingness to have sex with someone else outside a committed relationship
– stable personality trait and makes behaviour reoccur; usually avoidant ppl
2. Risky relationship: infidelity is more likely to occur when partners are not strongly
committed, dissatisfied, sexually disconnected, have poor communication
3. Risky context: physical closeness to available partners, through laptop or smartphone,
travelling a lot, working oversees or irregular hours, more common during summer months
 Ppl progress down slippery slope to cheating

Dealing with Infidelity

 40% have been in a relationship where cheating was discovered
 42% were discovered from 3rd parties
 50% were discovered from their partners – 32% unsolicited and 19% solicited
 7% were caught red-handed
 Best if cheater told their partner, especially unsolicited  less negative effect on
relationship, greater chance of forgiveness, less chance of breakup, allows cheater
opportunities for apologizing, etc.
 Third party and red-handed discoveries have the worst effects on relationships and
forgiveness (partner is unfaithful AND dishonest)
Types of Aggressive Behaviour
 Family sociology perspective: equal rates b/w men and women, or greater rates by women
 Advocacy perspective: men are almost always perpetrators and women are victims
1. Situational couple violence: tense verbal exchange escalates to physical altercation –
moderately threatening violence, more likely for women = reactive
2. Coercive controlling violence: aggression is used to dominate the other partner, more likely
for men (batterers) = proactive
 People in coercive violence are more likely to benefit from individual therapy and more
likely to be diagnosed with psychological disorder (antisocial, borderline personality)
 Perpetrators isolate their partners from others, emotionally dependent or abusive, lash out
if they think their partners will leave them
 victims may be economically dependent and have no better options
 violent resistance: abused women may fight back to coercive controlling partners – must
consider the context of the situation in CTS

Situational Couple Violence

 More than half in engaged couples, but reduced in marriage bc divorce is their solution
 Slightly less for dating couples than newlyweds bc they have less contact and control over
each other, more for cohabitating couples
 Unilateral aggression is perpetrated by 1 partner, bilateral aggression is perpetrated by
both partners (more common)  reciprocity determines severity
 More common to be used and elicited by women for self-defence, to express unhappiness
 Men are more likely to injure women and use sexual coercive aggression
bisexual ppl are at higher risk for severe aggression than gay, lesbian, or straight couples
 Persistent  high aggression in the beginning of the relationship predicts aggression later
on, usually unrelated to aggression in other relationships
 Not related to personality, but depends on a couple’s communication in heated situations
 After violence occurs, partners are likely to withdraw and avoid confronting difficult
situations, losing opportunities for future closeness
 Physical aggression is more likely to happen if person also uses verbal aggression
 Overlook violence bc they see it as infrequent and as a consequence of poor communication
 committed partners decrease severity of negative events and make excused for partners

Explaining Situational Couples Violence

1. Sociocultural perspective  relationship violence can be understood by society’s general
view on violence (social and cultural factors)
- Countries where women have higher education, freedom, and status have less violence
- Divorce laws, education, and economic equality can make ppl less vulnerable
2. Interpersonal perspective  features within relationships such as passion, privacy,
interdependency, and invitation to conflict can spark violence
- Aggressive partners are harsher, feel more upset, reciprocate behaviours that make
disagreements worse, less skilled at reading emotions, see negative behaviours as
intentional or selfish
 - Outburst occur more during stress and under influence of alcohol or drugs
- Therapy should focus on enhance communication on conflicts and disagreements
3. Intraindividual perspective  partner’s enduring qualities and personal histories
- Exposure to family violence teach children models of aggression and hostility
- Need to recognize situations and emotions that lead to aggression and how to have
adult non-violent relationships

Lecture 10 – Nov 26
Breaking Up and Being Single
Divorce
 Increased beginning in mid 1930s bc divorce became easier and didn’t need to, peaked in
1980 bc didn’t need present reasons/evidence (no fault)
 Leveled off and is now deceasing
 2/3 of coupes make it to 10-year anniversary
 50% in US, 40% in Canada (estimated 38-41)

Prevalence in Canada
 60% of marriages will last 30+ years
 Average age of marriage is 31 for men and 29 for women
 60% of couples will remain married in their 60s
 Marriages are the least likely to end than dating or cohabitating relationships
 Research is mostly on heterosexual couples

Why are Divorce Rates so High?

1. Suffocation Model of Marriage (high expectations)
 Esther Perel (2007)  we turn to one person to provide what an entire village once did,
expect relationships to be romantic and sexually + emotionally fulfilling
 Expecting more of the relationship now than in the past
 Not investing sufficiently to meet these expectations, but some ppl can flourish (climbing
mountain w/o oxygen)

History of Marriages – Eli Finkel

 Marriage as we now know today are fairly new
 Pragmatic era (1620-1850)  needed to marry and have children to live (economic,
survival)
- related to physiological and safety needs
 Love-based era (1850-1965)  breadwinner-homemaking model and gender roles, but not
purely economic or practical and still have underlying love (mostly in Western culture)
- related to belonging and love needs bc society progresses to protect basic needs
 Self-expressive era (1965-today)  love is still the basis, but we want partners to achieve
self-actualization or growth, challenge us, help achieve goals/dreams, etc.
- related to esteem and self-actualization needs
 - can yield much more happiness if achieved than in the past eras BUT requires a lot of
time and investment
- spending time together, showing affection, gaining deep insight into each other’s self-
actualization or motivational needs

Evidence of Suffocation Model

 meta-analysis (2007) correlation b/w marital quality and changes in well-being is r=+0.48
uniformly positive over all eras
size of the effect is getting bigger; 2x stronger now than in 1970-80s
people relying more on marriages now for well-being
 Social isolation and support  reliance on parents, siblings, coworkers, and friends is
decreasing BUT reliance on spouse is increasing
 Being “very happy” in marriages  % of ppl reporting being a very happy relationships is
declining overtime
- only about 60% “very happy” in 2014 compared to almost 70% in 1972
 time spent with spouses  couples w/o children are still spending more time with spouse
than couples with children, but both have declined over the years
- Shared activities (eating together, leisure, visiting friends, working in house) are also
decreasing

2. Women Work Outside of Home

 Have more economic freedom to leave a dissatisfying relationship
 Spouses report more conflict b/w work and family bc breadwinner-homemaker roles
conflict
 the more hours a wife works outside the lower the quality of marriage
 amount of times spouses spend together is declining

3. Changing Gender Roles

 Women are becoming more assertive and self-reliant
 Partners are dividing household responsibilities more equitably than in the past
 Shared housework = Men are getting less satisfied; women are getting more satisfied
 When housework is split in half, both partners are satisfied instead of only one partner

4. Western Culture Becoming Individualistic

 Less tied to communities and less likely to live near extended family
 Less social support and companionship which has implications = ask more from spouses,
less affected by community norms that discourage divorce
 People moving a lot are more prone to divorce bc they have less sense of community
 Highest divorce rates Portugal and Spain (>60%), then US and Russia (50-59%), then Canada
and Australia (40-49%), lowest rates are in Mexico and South America (0-9%)
 Individualistic cultures have highest divorce rates, not necessarily just Western culture
5. Divorce is Less Shameful and Easier to Obtain
 Our perceptions of divorce are a lot less negative than our parents
 Less likely to work to rescue a faltering relationship when divorce is an easier/acceptable
alternative

6. Increased Exposure to Divorce

 Children of divorce are more likely to be divorced themselves in adulthood
 Can be due to social learning, less resources during relationship conflicts, more accepting

Couple Reasons
 Infidelity, incompatibility, drinking or substance abuse, growing apart, personality problems,
communicating problems, abuse, love was lost
 0% of women did not report “IDK” but 9% of men did not know  women are more likely
to initiate divorce and know why
 In non-marital breakups, men and women are equally likely to initiate breakup

Vulnerability Stress Adaptation Model (VSA)

1. Enduring vulnerabilities  each person enters relationship with vulnerabilities or
dispositions that influence how people relate to conflict or stress
- Ex: coping skills, background relationships
2. Stressful events  need to cope and adapt, but some people are better or worse
depending on their vulnerabilities
- Ex: illness, unemployment, life transitions
3. Adaptive responses  ways partners deal will conflict or stress
- Influence marital quality and marital stability
- Martial quality can also feedback in adaptive responses (bi-directional)

PAIR Project
 Processes of Adaption in Intimate Relationships
 >50% are still married, 35% divorced, 20% married and unhappy, 45% married and happy
 Test 3 possibilities for high rates of divorce:
1. Enduring dynamic model  problems emerge during courtship and recognized before
marriage
- Marriages heading for divorce are weaker from the beginning
2. Emergent distress explanation  problems emerge after the marriage
- No differences at the beginning b/w couples who divorce or don’t
- Couples need to protect against declines, disagreements, negativity, etc.
3. Disillusionment model  early marriage perceptions are unrealistically positive, then
problems emerge once perceptions become more realistic
- Accurate perceptions and expectations can prevent disappointment
 Both enduring dynamics and disillusionment model predict divorce
 Couples who had steepest decline in positive feeling or perception were at greatest risk for
divorce (disillusionment model is best)
 problems faced at the beginning can cause later decline (enduring dynamics)

Early Years of Marriage Project

 Most black couples (55%) were divorced 16 years later compared to 36% of white couples
 Results were bc of low income and equality
 Ppl in low-income neighbourhoods had highest rates of divorce than higher-income
neighbours, and differences become larger over time
 Couples with low SES have fewer resources, more health difficulties, lower education, little
free time = stress from these spills over into relationships

Aftermath of Divorce
 Health outcomes  2nd most stressful event after death of spouse, decreases physical well-
being
 Social networks  more time with family and friends, might lose social networks tied to ex
 Economic resources loss of joint income; men’s standard of living increases, but women’s
outcome decreases
 Relationship dissolutions leads to better outcomes when the relationship quality was really
poor (more benefits of divorce than staying together)

Nonmarital Breakups
 Both physical and emotional implications
 Meta-analysis of studies that were longitudinal, assessed 1+ relevant predictors, and looked
at stability at a later time
 Low commitment, love, self-other overlap = large effects (strong predictors)
 Low closeness, investments, satisfaction, self-disclosure, network support or high
alternatives = medium effects (moderate predictors)
 Low relationship duration and high avoidant attachment = small effects (weak predictors)

Break-Up Decisions
 All predictors are essentially about the self
 Can ppl make decisions that are prosocial?
 Longitudinal study in newer/shorter relationships  questioned perceived partner
commitment, anticipated partner distress, relevant self-focused controls
 Asked couples weekly if they broke up (14%), evaluated partner who initiated the breakup
 ppl who perceived partner’s commitment and partner’s distress as high predicted lower
breakups
 consider partner’s feelings when making decisions about whether to stay together or not,
not just our ow feelings
 people may stay in unsatisfying relationships for partner’s sake, may try to ride out rough
times = may be a barrier to end chronically unfulfilling relationships
 Perceptions of Breakups
 Affective forecasting study  38% broke up within the first 6-months were analyzed
 Measured actual distress in ppl who broke up and predicted distress if they were to breakup
 Actual distress levels started high after breakup and decreased over time
 Predicted distress was much higher, but also decreased over time
 People DO recover from a breakup better than they expected and happens more quickly
than expected

Singlehood
 More ppl single than in relationships (52% in Canada, 48% coupled)
 Very little research on single ppl and experiences
 Meta-analysis showed that married ppl report greater well-being compared to single ppl

Social Support
 Single ppl might perceive less social support,
 Even though they have more friends, spend more time with friends and family and better
quality in them
 Could be because of perception of having no partner = no support

Social Stigma
 Stigmatization of adults who are single
 Not recognized as other “isms”, nonviolent, softer from bigotry
 Not recognized, but when it’s pointed out ppl think it’s legitimate
 Married ppl are described as mature, stable, honest, happy, kind, and loving
 Single ppl are described immature, insecure, self-centered, unhappy, lonely, and ugly (but
also independent)
 ppl read vignettes and asked about how the person is miserable and lonely or warm and
caring
- single ppl are rated as more miserable and lonely EVEN by single raters
- coupled ppl are rated as warmer and more caring across all raters

Singlehood and Happiness

 ppl need human contact, but the contact varies and doesn’t have to be a partner
 have less demands from relationships, can spend more time with themselves, learn not to
feel ashamed
 happy married ppl had healthier BP and more self-reported life satisfaction than single ppl
 BUT unhappy married ppl have worse BP than single ppl
 Relationship > single > unhappy relationship

Happily Single
 Measures of relationship status, health/well-being, avoidance social goals
 Avoidance social goals: trying to sustain social bonds by avoiding relationship conflict and
tension = happiest when they have nothing to worry about
 Ppl high in avoidance goals don’t differ in well-being if they’re single or in a relationship =
freed from the stress of relationships and don’t face consequences of being single
 Ppl low in avoidance goals are much better in relationships
Fearing of Being Single
 Concern, anxiety, or distress regarding current OR prospective experience of not having a
romantic partner
 Can fear being single when actually single or in a relationship
 Not just for women  men had stronger desire for relationships bc they have less social
support w/o it
 Examples = missing out of companionship, growing old alone, not having kids/family, losing
current partner, negative judgments from others, not having social networks, feeling
worthless
 Ppl high in fear are more likely to settle for a lower quality partner (measured in
responsiveness)
 Both ppl high and low fear are interested in responsive target, BUT ppl high in fear wanted
unresponsive partner just as much
 Ppl are also more likely to stay in unsatisfying relationships bc of fear of being alone